rotmanmagazine.ca / 47a more abstract, high-level mindset was activated, people ex-
hibited stronger preferences for immediate want outcomes over
delayed should rewards. Inducing people to adopt a higher-level
‘construal mindset’ is therefore one way to increase future ori-
ented decision making.
- DEPLETION. As indicated, a growing body of research suggests
that exerting willpower comes at a cost, and that cost is a reduc-
tion in available self-control resources for use in future choices.
In other words, individuals have limited self-regulatory resources,
and exerting self-control to avoid wants in one situation can de-
crease one’s subsequent ability to exert self-control.
In one study designed to test this theory, researchers showed
that participants who resisted eating chocolate chip cookies (an
obvious want for most people) quit working on unsolvable puzzles
earlier (where persistence is a should behaviour) than did indi-
viduals who resisted eating radishes — an activity that for most
people, requires little self-control. This and other studies illustrate
the paradox that by exercising self-control now, we increase the
likelihood that we will give in to our desires to indulge later. Fortu-
nately, although the self-control muscle can be weakened through
repeated use, it can also be strengthened through proper exercise:
One study found evidence that practicing small acts of self-con-
trol greatly increased smokers’ chances of successfully quitting. - JOINT VS. SEPARATE EVALUATIONS. The outcomes of want vs.
should conflicts are also influenced by whether we evaluate op-
tions one-at-a-time or simultaneously. Although want options
tend to be preferred at a higher rate than should options in isola-
tion, we are more likely to think about the costs and benefits of
each option and make far-sighted choices when multiple options
are evaluated at the same time. For example, when viewed in iso-
lation, a charity that saves baby polar bears may seem more al-
luring and receive more donations than a charity that funds skin
cancer research. However, when these choices are compared
side-by-side, people tend to donate to the charity that helps peo-
ple, viewing its mission as more important, albeit less emotion-
ally resonant. This research highlights that presenting want and
should options simultaneously rather than sequentially is one
way to promote more should choices.
6. MOOD EFFECTS. Positive mood has been shown to facilitate fu-
ture-oriented decision making, and a number of explanations
have been proposed for this. One account is that experiencing
positive emotions signals to decision makers that their current
situation is non-threatening, which reduces discounting of the
future and thus makes shoulds relatively more attractive.
Another reason is that positive emotions can counteract
‘ego depletion’, restoring the depleted willpower resources
necessary for selecting should options. In one study, research-
ers demonstrated that after randomly assigning participants
to watch clips of videos that induced either a happy or neutral
mood, those placed in a positive mood were more likely to se-
lect a should option (grapes) over a want option (M&Ms). How-
ever, they found that the tendency for positive moods to in-
crease should choices is attenuated by elevated arousal because
arousal is depleting.
Research has also explored the impact of negative emo-
tions on want/should conflict. Recent studies have demonstrat-
ed that these emotions can lead to self-control breakdowns.
For instance, sadness increases decision makers’ tendency to
focus on immediate gratification and to dramatically discount
future outcomes. Together, this research shows that people who
are relaxed and happy are more likely to make should choices,
whereas individuals who are emotionally aroused or in a nega-
tive mood are more likely to reach for instant gratification.
7. LICENSING EFFECTS. Interestingly, our choice between a want and
a should can also be affected by decisions we have made in the
past, as well as those we anticipate making in the future. Research
shows that people feel ‘licensed’ to make (or justified in mak-
ing) want choices if they believe they have previously engaged in
should behaviours or if they anticipate having opportunities to en-
gage in should behaviours in the future.
For example, people who were asked to imagine they would
partake in a should behaviour (e.g., donating part of their tax re-
bate to charity, volunteering for community service), relative to a
control group who did not imagine any such future good behav-
iour, were more likely to select a desirable want product (e.g., a
pair of designer glasses) over a cognitively favourable should prod-
uct (e.g., a less expensive but more utilitarian pair of glasses).